Fragged

Alright, since you asked me, I'll weigh in on the latest Extreme Media conniption over the "outspoken" authoress and political Mortal Kombat fighter Ann Coulter.

The other day, in an e-mail interview by John Hawkins at the Right Wing News Web site, Coulter was asked to give her opinion of certain people, among them Ameriphobic Congressman John Murtha. Coulter responded with her characteristic single brief line: "The reason soldiers invented 'fragging.'"

First, let's establish the definition of "fragging":

To wound or kill (a fellow soldier) by throwing a grenade or similar explosive at the victim.

Now, then, let's ask the question the conclusion to which the Extreme Media has already jumped: Was Ms. Coulter suggesting that Congressman Haw-Haw have a live grenade dropped in his shorts? And the answer is: No, that's way too much of a stretch. If that's what Ann had meant to say, I have no doubt whatsoever that she would have successfully communicated that sentiment.

Next question: Was Ms. Coulter suggesting that Congressman Haw-Haw should have had a live grenade dropped in his shorts back in his Marine Corps days? Answer: No, that's even less plausible, because it's only been in the past couple of years that Murtha has turned traitor.

Third question: Was Ms. Coulter suggesting that Murtha, today, is the type of individual that, as a combat officer, is likely to get "fragged"? Answer: Yes, I think we have a winner.

Consider: Murtha is a cynical, two-faced opportunist, a manipulative, dishonest narcissist who turned turncoat in order to gain the notoriety he'd need to advance himself politically (i.e. his vastly prematurely announced candidacy for a House Majority Leader's post for which he is a lot less likely to be eligible than he evidently thinks he is). He pretends to be "anti-war" for the benefit of the troops when he is in fact working against them and their interests by doing everything he can to hinder the accomplishment of the mission to which they, unlike he, are all committed.

He is, in short, untrustworthy. And commanders in whom soldiers cannot place their trust are, on balance, more likely to end up with a live grenade down their shorts. And that, it seems to me, is what Ann Coulter was saying.

However, there is a difference between this uproar and the previous one regarding the Jersey Girls. Whereas in that case the EM took one passage from her book and tried (unsuccessfully) to twist it against her (which only focused extra attention on the devastating point she was actually making - or, put another way, it drew attention to her book, which is in everybody's best interest, not just hers), in this instance Ann has taken the focus off of her book and onto herself via an entirely unnecessary choice of words that, while rapierly clever, only succeeded in drawing needless heat upon herself.

If John Hawkins had asked me what I thought of John Murtha, I'd have replied...well, with what I wrote above. Would that have stirred "controversy"? Sure. But it would have been "speaking the truth to idiocy" without creating the appearance, however far-fetched, of wishing ill upon the miserable, geriatric turd. And it would have kept the focus on Godless, where it belongs.

Another example, regrettably, of Ann Coulter being too clever for her own good.